Related

My daughter turns 6 today, and I know her eyes will light up as they did last year while watching the La Jolla fireworks.

I also know they’d glaze over if I tried to explain the three-year legal battle that lawyer Marco Gonzalez has fought to force the city of San Diego to require environmental reviews before permitting such pyrotechnic shows.

It seems most of your eyes would, too.

Welcome to my monthly roundup column.

I invited criticism in this space on June 12 when I called Gonzalez’s right to dissent “patriotic” and asked in an unscientific poll if you were concerned about the environmental effects of fireworks.

The vote wasn’t even close. “No” prevailed with 80 percent of a total 932 votes. And that was just the start of the conversation.

“Matt, please take your rightful place on Mt. Rushmore right next to Teddy Roosevelt,” reader Charles White wrote. “Marco, Sean Penn has agreed to play you in the movie version and the pope is prioritizing canonization. Congrats to you both! Let’s celebrate with fireworks!”

It’s but one way we interacted this past month.

Hundreds of you participated in another poll tied to a column of mine on the indefinite and possibly permanent grounding of the large Charles Lindbergh mural at the San Diego International Airport’s commuter terminal.

A whopping 90 percent of the 704 votes favored the mural’s return.

Yet no decision has been made on the 40-foot fate of “Lucky/Spirit.”

An airport authority spokeswoman said Tuesday that the art program’s manager has been out of the office since the mural was removed on June 19, and that the airport’s public arts committee doesn’t meet for three more months.

City spokesman Bill Harris told me Tuesday that San Diego expects to remove the tree this week after city arborists advised that it’s become unstable and a potential danger to passing motorists.

Harris said those arborists opposed a suggestion that arose in the wake of my column — to transplant the tree elsewhere in the city. Even if the tree were healthy enough, uprooting it would be too much of a disruption along Mission Boulevard, Harris said.

The tree stands, tilts really, on the sidewalk near an alley. If you want to go see it before it’s torn down and replaced by a younger Monterrey cypress, it’s at 3380 Mission Blvd.

Another poll, accompanying a column of mine last week, was the closest one we’ve done yet. It didn’t attract a lot of votes, but of the 92 cast, 52 percent agreed — with me — that the Mount Soledad cross would ultimately stay at its present site.

I had written a column revealing a bet I’d made seven years ago with an attorney involved in the Soledad cross case. We bet a burger and beers, and he said the cross would eventually come down. I predicted otherwise and on June 25 asked you, “Who would win the bet?”

The results again showed how divided the community is over this 23-year legal saga. Reader Malcolm Lagauche summed it up neatly: “As a journalist, the most satisfying experience is to have people of various opinions respond to an article you wrote. You’ve accomplished that.”